Deaf Education research......

Status
Not open for further replies.
posts from hell said:
I can get into this in a longer detail. Let me get back to you on this. I am short on time right now. my youtube is youtube.com/itztba and look for think tank introduction and lmk what you think.
Click to expand...
You aren't the only short on time. Have to stay offline from AD for one week or two from now on, but will hopefully be back for christmas.

Watched the video yesterday. Great ASL, and got your point. A few comments:

Guessing 2 students for 1 terp? Do we really know how many terps that needed? My impression is that many kids on CI don't have terps. Perhaps it's as low as 20 percent of kids? They perhaps have assistants, that are cheaper than terps, and only the first years?

We need to look at how much it cost to run a school for 2000 deaf kids. Less than 20 million dollars?

Making big budget like this would give a better picture. You said something about 70 precents dropping out? Sounds very expensive to the state.

Perhaps the schools with mainstreamed kids, don't want to fail profesonially, by saying: we don't know how to handle that kid? People are brainwashed on the leave no child behind policy, and want to keep their pride.

You have a good perspective and foundation of looking at the problem. Lots of questions to consider, but gotta think about that later when more time!
 
shel90 said:
Of course all deaf schools have their problems and there is ALWAYS room for improvement.

Would you rather be educated in an environment where you have full and direct access to language and communication or have to play the guessing game in an oral-only classroom?
Click to expand...
Shel. My theory is that if we really are going to show how superior deaf schools are to mainstream programs, we also have to focus on deaf schools, instead of only mocking poor mainstream programs.

You are doing the trinity of audists a favor here by telling them what's wrong with mainstream and oral programs, IMO. That way, oralists can improve them. Why don't we do the deaf schools the same favor?

Else, I find the question if I would go to a oral classroom insulting, but I am at the same time glad that if we can disagree, it means we have somewhere to look for improvement.
 
flip said:
Shel. My theory is that if we really are going to show how superior deaf schools are to mainstream programs, we also have to focus on deaf schools, instead of only mocking poor mainstream programs.

You are doing the trinity of audists a favor here by telling them what's wrong with mainstream and oral programs, IMO. That way, oralists can improve them. Why don't we do the deaf schools the same favor?

Else, I find the question if I would go to a oral classroom insulting, but I am at the same time glad that if we can disagree, it means we have somewhere to look for improvement.
Click to expand...

Not mocking the mainstreamed program. Just stating the real facts. Deaf kids dont have equal access to everything as their hearing peers do.
 
To the credit of our school district, their goal was to educate our child and not to save money.
Click to expand...
Well then you are damn lucky that your child did not need super intense accomondations. You have NO IDEA. NO IDEA what those of us who were mainstreamed who only got very minimal accomondations went through!
I got basicly front row seating, auditory trainer, speech therapy and time in the resource room. I didn't even get a NOTETAKER or a TOD!!!! And the teachers and experts and accomondations acted like my parents were the kind of parents who diagnosed shopped so that I could get an "edge" with untimed tests and crap! You have NO freaking CLUE!!! If your daughter had needed more intense accomodnations, I think you would be a bit more understanding. It's good that your daughter did so well.......but not every dhh kid did.....and you have to stop taking crictism of a particlar methodology, mode of education or whatever as a personal attack on your choices!
 
deafdyke said:
Well then you are damn lucky that your child did not need super intense accomondations. You have NO IDEA. NO IDEA what those of us who were mainstreamed who only got very minimal accomondations went through!
I got basicly front row seating, auditory trainer, speech therapy and time in the resource room. I didn't even get a NOTETAKER or a TOD!!!! And the teachers and experts and accomondations acted like my parents were the kind of parents who diagnosed shopped so that I could get an "edge" with untimed tests and crap! You have NO freaking CLUE!!! If your daughter had needed more intense accomodnations, I think you would be a bit more understanding. It's good that your daughter did so well.......but not every dhh kid did.....and you have to stop taking crictism of a particlar methodology, mode of education or whatever as a personal attack on your choices!
Click to expand...

Ignore those people who are discrediting our experiences. They aren't worth the aggravation.

We were screwed by the public school system jjust like many other dead/hh children and if some people can't accept it, let them leave their rosy colored glasses on.
 
flip said:
Shel. My theory is that if we really are going to show how superior deaf schools are to mainstream programs, we also have to focus on deaf schools, instead of only mocking poor mainstream programs.

You are doing the trinity of audists a favor here by telling them what's wrong with mainstream and oral programs, IMO. That way, oralists can improve them. Why don't we do the deaf schools the same favor?

Else, I find the question if I would go to a oral classroom insulting, but I am at the same time glad that if we can disagree, it means we have somewhere to look for improvement.
Click to expand...

I would love to see the deaf schools back under Deaf people's control. The deaf schools had been hijacked since 1880. I am afraid that they will close all the deaf schools before we get them back. If so, then we will have to start from scratch. How do we get the Deaf Education back under our control???
 
More Deaf people becoming adminstrators or run for office.
 
shel90 said:
More Deaf people becoming adminstrators or run for office.
Click to expand...

Do they have the power to change the curriculum? At ASDB, there is a deaf principal. I hear a rumor that since there are so many CI kids and they could change it to an oral school for the deaf starting with little ones. I hope it is just a false rumor. What can one do if the parents demand that the method is changed to oral???
 
Buffalo said:
Do they have the power to change the curriculum? At ASDB, there is a deaf principal. I hear a rumor that since there are so many CI kids and they could change it to an oral school for the deaf starting with little ones. I hope it is just a false rumor. What can one do if the parents demand that the method is changed to oral???
Click to expand...

that doesn't surprise me. Especially if the school is off of taxpayer's money. Parents are going to get upset by this, but if they change it to oral school, then what's the point of having a deaf school when public school already provide that using IEP
 
Edited and ended up being a double post. Sorry
 
Last edited:
It is already happening in some places..parents demanding hearing teachers over the deaf ones.

That's why once I get booted out of the Deaf Ed field simply because I am deaf, that's the end for my putting my love for teaching. I will find a different career where I won't get pushed out by the audists.

Not worth my time and investment.
 
It is already happening in some places..parents demanding hearing teachers over the deaf ones.

That's why once I get booted out of the Deaf Ed field simply because I am deaf, that's the end for my putting my love for teaching. I will find a different career where I won't get pushed out by the audists.

Not worth my time and investment to fight against a bunch of ignorant and discriminatory people.
 
deafgal001 said:
that doesn't surprise me. Especially if the school is off of taxpayer's money. Parents are going to get upset by this, but if they change it to oral school, then what's the point of having a deaf school when public school already provide that using IEP
Click to expand...

Because there is a huge difference between a mainstream teacher and a real Teacher of the Deaf. Oral schools provide language immersive environments that are tailored to the needs of oral deaf kids. Mainstream schools are for hearing kids, which oral deaf kids are not. Also, oral deaf schools have staff who know how to troubleshoot devices, they are SLP who specialize in deaf kids as well as often having on-site audiology. The professionals can coordinate their services so that kids aren't having to be constantly pulled out. Also, this way they get the benefit of socialize with other deaf kids.
 
rick48 said:
I think this falls into the category of "shoot first, ask questions later" or in your case, "respond first, read later"


What part of "Even after factoring in the costs of services for my child...." do you not understand? If you are going to make up things I said, at least make a superficial attempt to be accurate.

How can you possibly know what constitutes the majority in this situation?* How can you possibly know if the costs of the accommodations and services being provided to children with cochlear implants in the mainstream is usually more than the cost per student of the School for the Deaf in their area? Have you calculated the per student costs of every School for the Deaf nationwide and then compared it against the costs of accommodations and services being provided to each and every mainstreamed cochlear implanted child in this country?

Most important of all, how can you possibly know what is the best academic setting for each and every child?

No wait, that's right, you have a study that proves you are right, that you have previously provided... And it goes round and round again.

In our case, the School for the Deaf in our area is very costly to operate and with declining enrollment, it was driving up the per pupil costs so that even after factoring the costs of my child's accommodations and services (note I said she was receiving them), the per year difference was in excess of $30,000.00. In our case, the mainstream was the most appropriate setting for her, academically and socially but that is all it is: our case.

Bottom-line, for some deaf children, a School for the Deaf may be the appropriate academic setting and for others it may be a mainstream setting. Hopefully a child is being placed in the most appropriate setting for THAT child and not the least expensive.
Rick
Click to expand...

Unfortunately many parents are not as informed as you and your wife were, and often they are passive about their child's education, thus $$$ comes into play. As a result, many children are placed in the wrong setting. It makes me so mad!!! I always tell the parents, do your research...because just about no one else is going to do it for you. I'm glad you mentioned that one placement isn't right for all. We got to get the "Individualized" word back in the IEP.
 
shel90 said:
It is already happening in some places..parents demanding hearing teachers over the deaf ones.

That's why once I get booted out of the Deaf Ed field simply because I am deaf, that's the end for my putting my love for teaching. I will find a different career where I won't get pushed out by the audists.

Not worth my time and investment to fight against a bunch of ignorant and discriminatory people.
Click to expand...

It happened to me a couple of times...I was like, WTF?!!!!!! And for the principal to honor their request! WHAT!?! I was mad. But whatever. So they transferred the kid...then of course, a few months later the parents go back saying they wanted me back because obviously the kid started to regress because they were not understanding the new teacher. OH, really? Hmm. I wanted to say, well fuck that. But I didn't. As always, the professional. Uh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top